There's No Place Like Home

2012
5.9| 1h1m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 16 October 2012 Released
Producted By:
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

On December 10, 2010, Sotheby's auctioned off what could be considered the most important historical document in sports history -- James Naismith's original rules of basketball. "There's No Place Like Home" is the story of one man's fanatical quest to win this seminal American artifact at auction and bring the rules "home" to Lawrence, Kansas, where Naismith coached and taught for over 40 years.

Genre

Documentary

Watch Online

There's No Place Like Home (2012) is currently not available on any services.

Cast

Director

Maura Mandt, Josh Swade

Production Companies

There's No Place Like Home Videos and Images
View All
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

There's No Place Like Home Audience Reviews

Karry Best movie of this year hands down!
SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie
Mjeteconer Just perfect...
pointyfilippa The movie runs out of plot and jokes well before the end of a two-hour running time, long for a light comedy.
bnevs18 This is basically a piece about the filmmaker, his passion for Kansas basketball, his tons of money, and his ego. He sort of claims ownership of basketball and the document for himself and Kansas. This isn't really a film like so many other of the 30 for 30s (focusing on the connection between sports and humanity), but a way for a rich Kansas fan to stroke his ego. Complete waste of time.
delfearo Recently a load of episodes of 30 for 30 have been on TV. I started watching this episode "No Place like Home" half expecting to turn it off way before the end as the premise sounded pretty boring: the original rules of basketball, created by Dr. Naismith were coming up for auction at Sotheby's and the filmmaker, Josh Swade, a huge Kansas University basketball fan decided that they belonged there.Well I was captivated enough to watch till the end, and motivated as a result to write this review. So clearly I found the episode "entertaining", although I am left with a very sour taste in my mouth.Basically Josh acts as if his life's work is to convince some sucker to pay millions of dollars for a piece of paper, so he can donate it to this University. All because he really likes this University's basketball team. Oh not to mention that this University didn't exactly support his pathetic crusade. This vanity project has very little to do with sport or history but everything to with how much Joshy boy loves this team. After you're introduced to the ridiculous level of fandom that this moron has achieved you have to wonder if there's a history of mental illness in his family.There are 3 chaps he actually tricks into appearing in his documentary, only after they are on camera does he tell the whole truth that he basically wants them to spend their money to buy a piece of paper for him. To their credit the gentlemen respond to this deceit and arrogance with more class that what I ever could.The 3rd bloke he begs must have a lot more money than sense, as he agrees that thee holy rules of basketball scrawled upon thy sacred paper belong in the Church of Jayhawks in Kansas. In seriousness the auction itself was tense and incredible, I couldn't believe the bidding war.Major Spoiler alert: Josh and his new extremely rich best friend win the auction, donate the rules to KU and the world keeps turning… World peace has not been attained, there are still millions on food stamps.. but a billionaire just paid over $4million on a piece of paper to give to an incredibly wealthy university. And most importantly: Josh Swade has been shown to be the best KU basketball fan of all time.
MartinHafer I know that my review will probably offend some folks, but my summary is exactly how I feel about this episode of "30 for 30". Now I LOVE this series---and have enjoyed dozens of the shows. BUT, I can't think of a single film in the series that elicited such a strong reaction in me.Recently the original rules of basketball that were created by Dr. Naismith were coming up for auction at Sotheby's. Not surprisingly, they were expected to fetch a huge price. Now here is where it gets weird. A totally fanatical University of Kansas fan has helped the filmmaker of "There's No Place Like Home". His cause? To do everything he can to guarantee that the University of Kansas becomes the possessor of these rules. There's SOME logic behind this. Dr. Naismith was the first coach of the university's basketball program and he worked at KU for a long time. BUT, here's the problem for me....who cares?! You see this nut traveling all across America and using a TON of his energy begging for donations. Couldn't he have spent his time more wisely--such as tutoring some illiterate inner-city kid or cutting a disabled person's lawn?! And, couldn't the donors have used their money to make a difference--like curing some deadly disease?! To me, sports are okay....but there needs to be SOME perspective. This guy seems to say that the worst thing in the world would be for these rules to go to Duke. What about chemical weapons or famine?! This film, probably unintentionally, makes one of the best arguments for why we really DON'T need professional or college sports! The show was well-made but who cares? Focusing so much on this one man seemed to make the show about him and not much more. A rare misstep for this great show.
bob the moo There are loads of great stories in sports; great comebacks, shock upsets, conflict, unity, obsession and intrigue – the schedules mean that we move on to the next one so quickly and it is good to have a series like this where there is room for reflection and documenting of these tales. Mostly that has been my experience with this series – that the subjects engage me. So, with so many great stories and this series trying to tell them, why does it spend an hour on story about a filmmaker making a film about himself trying to convince a very rich man to spend a chunk of his considerable wealth on a piece of paper so it can exist in his team's premises rather than another team's premises?I'm simplifying the plot here but I'm not the only one – because the film does this too. The story opens with some detail behind the team and the man in question and it is during the introduction and titles that questions are asked about the nature of this loyalty etc and I assumed that the film would be taking this approach – using the central concept as a way of exploring bigger issues. In a way I was partly right because to a point the basketball rules are a MacGuffin to allow for the real story to occur; the story of Josh. This was his idea, his passion and he needs money to do it for himself so that he can make his dream into reality and boy does he let us know it. I honestly doubt that any other word was said in this film as often as the words "I", "Me", "Mine" and a few other similar words because this film is from Josh and about Josh – and sadly not even in a meaningful way. He doesn't use himself as a microcosm of a bigger story or as an illustration of something else, he simply tries to make this idea happen by asking a couple of rich people for money in very stiff interviews.The film gives some information about the creator of basketball and Josh's team but it is very brief and focused on facts that will be known already if you know the subject well. This leaves us following Josh around for his couple of house calls, watching staged reaction shots (and if they are not staged then they are certainly very stiff). There is some drama in the actual auction at the end, but otherwise the film is very simple and really comes down to one guy telling Josh that he will pay for it as long as it doesn't go above a certain amount; nothing complex or odd – just a guy with money to spare, sparing it on a piece of sporting history. It isn't particularly good as a subject and it isn't helped by how often we have monologues and interviews with Josh (where the word "I" is the majority of what he says, since he is only ever talking about himself). Like I said, this wouldn't have mattered if he had used himself to do something of note but after 30 minutes it does start feeling like an ego trip for him – a feeling that only increases as Josh acts up in the background of someone else spending money or the scene where Josh presents the rules (which someone else bought with their money) to the University.Ultimately this film is about a rich guy spending an obscene amount of money to buy some sporting memorabilia – that's the story here but it is framed as being fan-driven to make it more palatable. Shame then that the addition to Josh to this story of a rich man spending his money, doesn't actually make the film better – it simply makes it feel weird that he is so focused on even though all he had was an idea and a few begging meetings; and then you realize that he made this film about himself – then it just feels weirder again. It should have had a wider point and should have told more stories of interest, but instead we spend loads of time with Josh chasing money.There are loads of great sporting stories in the world. I have no idea why this one got told as part of such a high-profile series.